Socioeconomic Burden of Psoriatic Arthritis in Hong Kong: Direct and Indirect Costs and the Influence of Disease Pattern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the direct costs and indirect costs of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Hong Kong. METHODS: A retrospective cost-of-illness study was performed on 125 patients with PsA. Participants completed questionnaires on demographics, employment status, and out of pocket expenses. Health resources consumption was recorded by chart review and patient self-report questionnaire. Patients were grouped according to disease pattern, i.e., peripheral and axial disease. Multiple regression was used to determine the predictors of the costs. RESULTS: The average annual direct costs were $4,141 (2006 US dollars) per patient. Costs of inpatient care accounted for 27% of direct costs, followed by costs of visits to healthcare providers (25%). The estimated average indirect costs were $3,127 per patient-year. Forty-eight (42%) patients had no indirect costs. Sixty percent of patients with peripheral disease were still employed, compared to 39% of patients with axial disease. Patients with axial disease had almost twice the indirect costs compared to those with peripheral disease (p = 0.005). Increased pain and poor function were independently associated with increased direct costs. Worse physical health status, determined by indirect costs borne by the patient, and poor function and old age predicted high costs. CONCLUSION: PsA imposes substantial economic burden. Pain and function are significantly associated with costs. Improvements in treatments to reduce pain and restore function are likely to reduce the costs incurred by these patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".